Internet Statement 2003-37
For years the reports about the allegedly forthcoming upswing have been all the same: it is about to come within half a year or a year. In reality there has been an intense crisis for more than two years, which is an overproduction and sales crisis of the global economy in the very classical meaning. In the August 1st, 2003 issue of "Handelsblatt" there is a headline which has to be seen as an amplification with regard to this economic crisis: "Armament expenditure boosts American economy".
Setting up the capitalist production as a global economy doesn't eliminate
the contradictions but reproduces them on a higher ladder. This has become
clear especially during the last years. In this world we are experiencing
very classical overproduction crises as Marxism describes them. Big countries
like China, Indonesia, Brazil, the countries of the south-east Asian region,
Southern Africa, Eastern Europe became production centers for the whole
world where low and lowest wages are paid, centers of capitalist exploitation
in the truest meaning of the word, "classical" examples.
The imagination that Europe and especially Germany could be active above all in the services sector and stand out by high incomes, while the centers of the hard manual work, producing the surplus value, are situated far away from us - this economical imagination, for a long time ruling the fantasy of the bourgeois economists, carries in itself an additional aggravation of the international economy which proves to be insoluble for today’s political and economical system headed above all by the US. All the more we have to pay attention to reports like "Armament expenditure boosts American economy". We are reading:
Already once before a war had proved to be a "stimulator of economy",
it was the Yugoslavian war in early 1999. Let us repeat briefly the most
important of the events of the nineties: during the nineties the Asian
market grows to be a new enormous international potential. Together with
the development in Latin America and other countries of the former Third
World a new international upswing emerges which is just driven forward
by the shift of production but also by the development of an own inner
market, by the development of capitalism in China. Stocks and profits
are shooting up at that time, 1994 to 1997, more or less unbroken. 1997/1998
comes the first severe crisis including Russia as well. At first it is
managed to stop that crisis. Not at least the war events in Yugoslavia,
the massive change of armament and innovation of armament for the "New
World Order" lead already then to new momentum for stirring a change
of economy which lasts until about 2000. In 2000 we have again high growth
rates in most of the countries. Capitalism indulges in its future prospects.
The German government coalition of Social Democrats and Greens floats
on the imagination that an all-sided “services economy” is
developing, nourished by the profits from the world-wide production. Any
“ecologistict” extravagance seems to be affordable. The self-satisfaction
of the philistines and the apologists of capitalism knows no limits. They
want not only to play lotto but would rather bet on the best securities
and thus make a funny game out of the values which originate from the
sweat and exhausting work around the globe. Such is the philosophy of
the apologists of capitalism in 2000.
Now it's the war boom again what is to bring about the needed impetus temporarily. But how long will that last for this time? The Iraq war, anyhow, is bringing increasing difficulties and malaise for the US, as every rational person has predicted. So, what will the US do when the trouble will go on brewing? Anyhow, the economic upswing will only come about as a short lasting stuttering process, after that there will be new delay. But in the background the armament spending is forced up extremelya
In a former issue of "Handelsblatt", of July 29th, 2003 there was a headline:
The armament groups of the US, Northrop Grumman (NG), Carlyle Group,
United Defense Industries, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon, in fact turn
out to have earned billions by the US’ armament, which is known
to be without any precedent and largely surpasses anything else, whereas
the rest of the economy is walking on crutches.
This shows how strongly the profits grow and how strongly the USA place the bet on the armament. An article standing just aside this one shows that it doesn't look much different in Europe. The aeronautics and space firm of “EADS pushes the development of the military branch”, we learn.
Besides this there also are of course immediate, own European armament
projects. It is also very characteristic, however, that the European arms
companies are also engaged on the American arms market. The arms market,
though, is always a line of business which doesn't flow back into the
production by itself, except for some technical innovations, its task
consisting in exerting force, in the present situation against those who
are “unwilling” regarding the leading imperialistic powers,
and in securing the domination. EADS has already taken part in deliveries
for the war against Iraq.
Pepping up the international economy by arms orders can always cause only further wars and must lead to their application. We aren't supporters of the theory of the military industrial complex which is said to cause this belligerent politics taken for himself. The war is caused by imperialism itself and the armament is the result, not the cause, of this imperialism. Such economic flashes in the pan, though, can result in between times. It was written in the above-mentioned article on August 1st, 2003:
Also other economists judge similarly. To sum it up, some U.S. economists themselves see the flash in the pan and the temporary character of the economic stimulation by arms orders.
The US’ concept to help capitalism to get a further development allegedly by opening up new markets and destroying old structures, such as the regime of Saddam Hussein or the Islamistic regimes in Central Asia, proves to be a Fata Morgana, because the US themselves are everywhere connected to the reactionary forces and the forces of destruction, and nobody buys their alleged role of a democratic development. This lies in the nature of imperialism itself.
The high debt policy of the US, her policy of continuously concentrating human and capital resources upon herself, shall actually further intensify the contradictoriness of capitalism and imperialism which we today can see as in a picture book. Hegemonism is itself an additional superstructure on top of the capitalist system which intensifies its contradictions. Its existence isn't coincidental. The existence of such hegemonic powers is necessary to give capitalism a frame, so to speak. Nonetheless it carries the core of terrible destruction within itself.
The great internationalisation of production, its socialisation at a
higher level is a basic feature of the whole industrial sector today.
What else is it if nowadays any stylish and practical bag, commercialized
in gigantic numbers internationally, is made at different production centres,
if its planning, projecting, development of design etc. all happen at
quite different places of the world. All of this shows that we have a
socialisation today which comprises the whole globe. We must tie to it.
Besides this there also are forms of the isolated small scale economy
and even the subsistence economy which in the poor regions secure survival
for quite a lot of people belonging to the industrial reserve army. It
is the task of all leftist and revolutionary organisations to uncover
the fundamental character of the capitalist and imperialistic society
and its contradictoriness; to fight every fabrication of illusions that
it could be possible to persist in an earlier stage of capitalism or the
small scale production, or to return to it. And it has to be shown that
only the joint action of the workers of all countries, as well as the
cooperation of all nations which are threatened, depressed or directly
suppressed by hegemonism or imperialism, prepares the solution to the
tasks. Every strike movement, every international approach of a trade
union movement, every cooperation of revolutionary forces in the world
is of great use today. Simultaneously we shall have to respect, promote
and support all the movements which out of the necessities, too, must
at first develop locally.